If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

While good in theory, I don't think this is practical. It's hard enough now to find judges, in a pass fail scenario. How difficult and contentious will it be when you open up the score sheets for all to view? What's the performance difference between an 8 and a 9? If you ask that question on this forum, you'll get twenty pages of heated rhetoric, and still not have an answer.

Again, I don't know what the answer is either...

I believe that you are over thinking this.

We all went to school, and while it was not a competition, we all received letter grades, and GPA's.
And while it was a pass/fail scenario, we all knew who the A students were, and who the C students were.

It wasn't that complicated, and there wasn't a need to explain the difference.

I have never been to the MN or the Grand. We have all heard about the 700 entries etc. By comparison how many entries does the Grand get each year? I know that the Grand has a Spring and Fall event. Would spliting the MN into two East/ West be feasible?

They are thinking of starting it the year that it is on the West coast. Where the entries are consistently the lowest!

So the 20-50 or so 'local' dogs will just be getting their MH this will not be able to enter and play.
People that could be potential volunteers for the event. Of course, I am thinking of people that run their own dogs, and are not handled by pros.

It's the MNH that is keeping SOME people from all over the country returning every year.

Isn't that a big reason that is why the entries have been huge the last 2 years?

It's the MNH that is keeping SOME people from all over the country returning every year.

Isn't that a big reason that is why the entries have been huge the last 2 years?

Debbie

That, and the fact that they removed the 5 out of 7 requirement, and just made it 6 passes, no matter how many tests it takes you. If they would institute the old qualification requirement, the numbers would return back to a manageable number.

I know when they had the previous 5 of 7 rule, handlers picked judges, clubs got 'easier' judges and people scratched after they watched the test dog if they thought it too tough to even start. Clubs must have protested?!

The latter created issues for clubs to deal with - but let's not get into that on this thread please!

I believe this is a poor solution . The 700 entry's is proof that we are encouraging folks to get out and train. By making it hard to play is going backwards. What we need is split MN events. If we keep promoting the game we will need to address the numbers eventually. Don't make it harder to play.

I believe this is a poor solution . The 700 entry's is proof that we are encouraging folks to get out and train. By making it hard to play is going backwards. What we need is split MN events. If we keep promoting the game we will need to address the numbers eventually. Don't make it harder to play.

the only TRUE way to bring these numbers down to a manageable amount is for each region to hold a pre-national qualifier event over a 3 day weekend....IMO.... this would benefit everyone....here you can ween out most of the dogs that just Squeaked through the qualifing system....then the MN event would TRULY be a test of the very best and most deserving dogs...... just my .02

the only TRUE way to bring these numbers down to a manageable amount is for each region to hold a pre-national qualifier event over a 3 day weekend....IMO.... this would benefit everyone....here you can ween out most of the dogs that just Squeaked through the qualifing system....then the MN event would TRULY be a test of the very best and most deserving dogs...... just my .02